Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

Title: Using an Extended Argumentation Framework based on Confidence Degrees for Legal Core Ontology Mapping
Authors: Trojahn, Cássia
Quaresma, Paulo
Vieira, Renata
Keywords: argumentation
legal ontologies
Issue Date: Jun-2007
Abstract: Web legal information retrieval systems use legal ontologies to represent semantic objects, to associate them with legal documents and to make inferences about them. The quality of the output of these systems can be improved with the ontology completeness, which can be obtained by the ontology merging process. The first step in this process is the ontology mapping. This paper proposes to use abstract argumentation frameworks to combine ontology mapping approaches. We extend the Value-based Argumentation Framework (VAF)[1], in order to represent arguments with confidence degrees. Our agents apply individual mapping algorithms and cooperate in order to exchange their local results (arguments). Next, based on their preferences and confidence of the arguments, the agents compute their preferred mapping sets. The arguments in such preferred sets are viewed as the set of globally acceptable arguments. We applied our model to map two legal core ontologies, LRI-Core and DOLCE-Lite, and to map LRI-Core with SUMO generic core ontology.
Type: article
Appears in Collections:INF - Artigos em Livros de Actas/Proceedings

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
sw4law.pdfArtigo192.47 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
FacebookTwitterDeliciousLinkedInDiggGoogle BookmarksMySpaceOrkut
Formato BibTex mendeley Endnote Logotipo do DeGóis 

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.


Dspace Dspace
DSpace Software, version 1.6.2 Copyright © 2002-2008 MIT and Hewlett-Packard - Feedback
UEvora B-On Curriculum DeGois